Not only can they but they SHOULD!  I've promoted this for a long time.

They might argue that one needs to have a positive doubt about the validity in order to justify even conditional consecration / ordination, but others clearly have a positive doubt and something like this could certainly be done for pastoral reasons.

Good luck.  I seriously doubt that will ever happen.  You could even potentially add Bp Neville into the mix.  Nevertheless, those individuals really do not care for each other and that is the biggest hurdle.  Sadly.

I have a theoretical question for all who might know, because I sure cannot figure it out.  

 :sad:Why cannot [won't] traditional Catholic bishops Kelly, Sanborn and Dolan conditionally consecrate each other to get rid of any “doubts” surrounding their respective consecrations?  This gesture would remove so much anxiety that poor church going souls have at the moment.  We traditional Catholics have the same enemy and his name is Satan with his army of spawns.  I know that all three men fought for the same cause, but over the years, personal filings [feelings] and prides might have been hurt.  I am not asking for them to become best friends, but please consider the anguish that a lot of poor souls are going through to get to Heaven, and to have any of them usurp the keys to the Kingdom is just plain wrong.  I personally do not have any doubts that any of the three men are valid Catholic bishops and I would love for them to acknowledge that as well.  Maybe this is a pipe dream of mine, but Satan ended up the way he is because of PRIDE.

God bless.

monka966

It seems to me there is a practical snag to overcome.  

If any one of them has something doubtful, then why would the other two not have something doubtful as well?  For if each one has a doubtful aspect, perhaps the same thing, or perhaps a different thing, then all three would have no power to do any good for any one of the three.  

If the identical doubt exists for each of the three, then they would still have the same doubt hanging over them when they're all done consecrating each other.  

Whatever the doubts are, would have to be clearly pronounced in advance and then, an assessment made about them.  Who would make the assessment?

Not only can they but they SHOULD!  I've promoted this for a long time.

They might argue that one needs to have a positive doubt about the validity in order to justify even conditional consecration / ordination, but others clearly have a positive doubt and something like this could certainly be done for pastoral reasons.

Is there some reason that +W would not be included in the discussion?  The other three could simply receive conditional consecration from him, since there is no doubts about +W's validity.  Is there any reason to question whether +W would be opposed to such a thing?  He already said, long ago, that his bishop's powers are available to anyone who needs them.  Or, would +W not be willing to do this because these 3 men have done something that +W doesn't approve of?

Good luck.  I seriously doubt that will ever happen.  You could even potentially add Bp Neville into the mix.  Nevertheless, those individuals really do not care for each other and that is the biggest hurdle.  Sadly.

So if they don't care for each other then why should anyone care for them?  


.

I believe that somewhere along the way the SGG faction recanted their position about the consecration of Kelley. So the only person or group left with issues is the SSPV. The SSPV has been corrected but refuses to acknowledge the correction.

As for myself and probably many others, I could care less what the SSPV cult thinks of the situation, I can't and won't receive the sacraments there anyways.

Personally, I'd like to see every group and individual let go of the baggage they have that keeps them from working together amicably.

There can be no doubt about the validity of Bp. Kelly's consecration.  In the link below, if you scroll down the page, you will find a link to the proof(pictures and legal docuмents) of Bp. Kelly's consecration.

http://congregationofstpiusv.net/BishopKelly.html

Monka - Under the "publications" tab on the cspv page link I provide above, you will find a free link to the online book "The sacred and the Profane" written by Bp. Kelly(a must read(all of it!) if you want the answer to your "why" question).  Fr. Cekada ignores/passes over the evidence/arguments of SaP in his article addressing the book.

In the book, Bp. Kelly presents the reasons why the sacraments derived from Abp. Thuc are "doubtful", and need to be regarded in the practical order as invalid.  

Here is the refutation to the arguments put forth in "The Sacred and the Profane"
http://www.thucbishops.com/

To date, they have been met with silence by the SSPV cult.

Here is the refutation to the arguments put forth in "The Sacred and the Profane"
http://www.thucbishops.com/

To date, they have been met with silence by the SSPV cult.

 
  Silence and not putting important things in writing, so there is always plausible deniability.

Elizabeth - show me the refutation that mentions Thuc's consecration(that means made a bishop) of an "openly" ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ non catholic.